IESG
Click on the red underlined text to get to the source
...
The Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG) is responsible
for technical management of IETF ...
... accepted and ratified by the Internet Society Trustees. The
IESG is directly responsible for the actions associated with
entry into and movement along the "standards track", as
...
... described in section 3 of this document, including final
approval of specifications as Internet Standards. The IESG
is composed of the IETF Area Directors ...
... Area Directors and the chairperson of
the IETF, who also serves as the chairperson of the IESG.
* IAB ...
... context of the Internet Standards process as a body to
which the decisions of the IESG may be appealed (as described
in section 3.6 of this document). The IAB is responsible for
...
... IAB is responsible for
approving appointments to the IESG from among the nominees
submitted by the IETF ...
... IETF and chartered by the ISOC Board of Trustees. The
appointment of IESG and of IAB members are made from these
nominations by the IAB ...
... Internet standards documents and other publications of the
IESG, IAB, and Internet community. RFCs are available for
...
... Internet standardization. Generally, they will be published
directly as RFCs at the discretion of the RFC editor and the
IESG. These RFCs will be marked "Prototype", "Experimental" or
"Informational" as appropriate (see section 2.3).
...
... remained unchanged in the Internet Drafts directory for more
than six months without being recommended by the IESG for
publication as an RFC, is simply removed from the Internet
Draft ...
... Proposed
Standard designation.
The IESG may require implementation and/or operational
experience prior to granting Proposed Standard status to a
...
... with respect to the requirements placed upon it. However, the
IESG may recommend that this requirement be explicitly reduced
in order to allow a protocol to advance into the Proposed
Standard ...
... support for their document).
For all these reasons, the IESG and the RFC Editor have agreed to
the following policy for publishing Info and Exp RFCs:
...
... the following policy for publishing Info and Exp RFCs:
1. The RFC Editor will bring to the attention of the IESG all
Informational and Experimental submissions that the RFC
...
... IETF
community.
2. The IESG will review all such referrals within a fixed length
of time and make a recommendation on whether to publish, or
to suggest that the author bring their work within the IETF ...
... IETF.
3. If the IESG recommends that the work be brought within the
IETF, but the author declines the invitation, the IESG ...
... IESG recommends that the work be brought within the
IETF, but the author declines the invitation, the IESG may
add disclaimer text into the standard boilerplate material
added by the RFC Editor (e.g., "Status of this memo").
...
... Internet or for which the interactions with existing
protocols are too complex to fully assimilate from the
written specification, the IESG may request that
operational experience be obtained prior to advancement to
Proposed Standard ...
... operational experience be obtained prior to advancement to
Proposed Standard status. In these cases, the IESG will
designate an otherwise complete specification as
"Prototype". This status permits it to be published as an
...
... advancing it within, or removing it from, the standards track --
must be approved by the IESG.
...
... Internet Draft for a period of time that permits useful
community review, at least two weeks, before submission to the
IESG with a recommendation for action.
...
... IESG Review and Approval ...
...
The IESG shall determine whether a specification satisfies the
applicable criteria for the recommended action (see Sections
3.2 and 3.3 of this document).
...
... 3.2 and 3.3 of this document).
The IESG shall determine if an independent technical review of
the specification is required, and shall commission one when
necessary. This may require creating a new Working Group ...
... Internet or on the suite of Internet protocols, the IESG shall
form an independent technical review and analysis committee to
...
... for advancement.
The IESG shall communicate its findings to the IETF to permit a
final review by the general Internet community ...
... significant issues that have not been resolved satisfactorily
during the development of the specification may be raised at
this time for final resolution by the IESG.
In a timely fashion, but no sooner than two weeks after issuing
...
... notification to the IETF mailing list, the IESG
shall make its final determination on whether or not to approve
the standards action, and shall notify the IETF ...
...
Following IESG approval and any necessary editorial work, the
RFC Editor shall publish the specification as an RFC. The
specification shall then be removed ...
... Internet Society Newsletter.
This shall constitute the "journal of record" for Internet
standards actions. In addition, the IESG shall publish a
monthly summary of standards actions completed and pending in
the Internet ...
... intervals shall be measured from the date of publication of the
corresponding RFC(s), or, if the action does not result in RFC
publication, the date of IESG approval of the action.
A specification may be (indeed, is likely to be) revised as it
...
...
A specification may be (indeed, is likely to be) revised as it
advances through the standards track. At each stage, the IESG
shall determine the scope and significance of the revision to the
specification, and, if necessary and appropriate, modify the
...
... more experience at its current maturity level before progressing.
Finally, if the specification has been changed very significantly,
the IESG may recommend that the revision be treated as a new
document, re-entering the standards track at the beginning.
...
... that does not represent a change in overall function of the
specification, may need to be corrected immediately. In such
cases, the IESG or RFC Editor may be asked to republish the RFC
with corrections, and this will not reset the minimum time-at-
level clock.
...
... Internet
Standard level but has remained at the same status level for
twenty-four (24) months, and every twelve (12) months thereafter
until the status is changed, the IESG shall review the viability
of the standardization effort responsible for that specification.
Following each such review, the IESG ...
... IESG shall review the viability
of the standardization effort responsible for that specification.
Following each such review, the IESG shall approve termination or
continuation of the development. This decision shall be
communicated to the IETF ...
... Internet Standards for the same function
should be retired. In this case, the IESG shall approve a change
of status of the superseded specification(s) from Standard to
Historic. This recommendation shall be issued with the same
...
... Working Group chair. If this proves
unsatisfactory, they should raise their concerns with an IESG Area
Director or other IESG member. In most cases, issues raised to
...
... unsatisfactory, they should raise their concerns with an IESG Area
Director or other IESG member. In most cases, issues raised to
the level of the IESG will receive consideration by the entire
...
... Area
Director or other IESG member. In most cases, issues raised to
the level of the IESG will receive consideration by the entire
IESG, with the relevant Area Director ...
... the level of the IESG will receive consideration by the entire
IESG, with the relevant Area Director or the IETF Chair being
...
... plenary or to pursue their issues privately, with any of the
relevant IETF/IESG management personnel. (2) Specifications that
are to be considered by the IESG ...
... IESG management personnel. (2) Specifications that
are to be considered by the IESG are publicly announced to the
IETF mailing list ...
... IAB may convene an appropriate review panel, which may then
recommend that the IESG and Working Group re-consider an
alternate technical choice.
...
... Working
Group participant may wish to pursue formation of a separate
Working Group. The IESG and IAB encourage alternative points
of view and the development of technical options, allowing
...
... vendor-proprietary specification is not widely and readily
available, the IESG may request that it be published as an
Informational RFC.
...
... specification shall be made available online.
The IESG shall not favor a particular vendor's proprietary
specification over the technically equivalent and competing
...
... email message to: "iana@isi.edu".
To contact the IESG, send an email message to: "iesg@cnri.reston.va.us".
...
... o Time Limit
An explicit time limit (e.g., 3 months) has been suggested for IESG
resolution concerning a standards action under the rules of Section
3.1.2. If it were necessary to extend the time for some reason,
...